The speedup is lacking. 12 cores is only 2x faster than 4 cores from 2010. I wonder how the GPU factors into these benchmarks.
Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
11–20 of 57 posts
Re: Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
#12The speedup is lacking. 12 cores is only 2x faster than 4 cores from 2010. I wonder how the GPU factors into these benchmarks.
Geekbench does not measure GPU performance at all AFAIK.
Re: Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely nobody uses that scheme for referring to memory speeds. Everybody uses the effective clock speed, and there's really nothing technically wrong about labeling that with MHz, since Hz isn't restricted to referring to only sinusoidal clock signals. If you're going to be pedantic, then you ought to make clear when you're referring to the memory clock speed or the I/O clock speed or the transfer rate. For anyon…
Hz refers to the number of cycles per second. Everybody uses this as the effective transfer clock, but hey, everybody is wrong. It's correct to use MT/sec instead, but you're right that it's being pedantic and it's unlikely to confuse anyone who really did care. On the other hand, it does stink of specmanship to quote the doubled frequency. I would have hoped a Pro spec machine would rise above that kind of thing.
The doubled frequency is just the way the market works. It is actually kind of nice when you are trying to compare sticks that are double sided vs. sticks that are single sided and actually run at the listed frequency.
Re: Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
#14The speedup is lacking. 12 cores is only 2x faster than 4 cores from 2010. I wonder how the GPU factors into these benchmarks.
[deleted]
Re: Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
#15>> "and includes the latest four-channel ECC DDR3 memory running at 1866 MHz to deliver up to 60GBps of memory bandwidth.* " - It should be "running at 933⅓ MHz". A DDR3-1866 module is 933⅓ MHz, 1866⅔ MT/s, ~15GB/s. They have quad channel DDR3-1866. (If you disagree - check the DDR3 spec. Article at apple.com is simply wrong in stating running at 1866 MHz I know it is a minor point, but when you are listing specs, yo…
You can also add the dual naming scheme that gives us gems like "PC3-14400" where the latter number is the MBps of bandwidth or something similarly confusing to 95% of people, myself included.
"PC3-14400" wouldn't be half so bad if there wasn't also "PC3-14440", "PC3-14444", "PC3-14000", and maybe "PC3-14402" depending on which manufacturer you are buying from. To make things even more dandy, they aren't interchangeable.
Re: Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
#16As someone who's never owned a mac pro can someone give an indication of how often "power" users are upgrading their CPU.
When I was a windows desktop user (up until about 8 years ago) I found that everytime i wanted upgrade the internals the CPU socket had changed along with the Mobo chipset necessitating a upgrade of not just CPU, but Mobo and memory.
I can understand swapping out gfx cards fairly regularly but are there that main users who completely gut their mac pro on a regular basis?
Re: Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
#17Registered Apple developers should watch WWDC 2013 session 109 to get a taste of what the new Mac Pro is capable of.
Re: Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
#18I'm just excited the older models will be getting less expensive soon so I can afford one.
Don't be too sure of that.. plenty of pros want upgradable systems... Most of the mac pro users I know tend to keep them 4-5 years or more, with an upgrade cycle every 12-24 months (faster cpu, more ram, ssd, etc) in the same box. The new form factor really limits that, and would probably be better served with a consumer grade CPU etc.. this is much closer to a mid-range desktop a lot of people have been asking for,…
this is much closer to a mid-range desktop a lot of people have been asking for, except it's going to cost an arm and a leg.
Kind of like Apple is pulling something like this:
Mid-range desktop you say? Hmm... Yes, I've got just the thing- How about a mid-range desktop with the price of a top-end desktop?
Re: Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
#19As someone who's never owned a mac pro can someone give an indication of how often "power" users are upgrading their CPU. When I was a windows desktop user (up until about 8 years ago) I found that everytime i wanted upgrade the internals the CPU socket had changed along with the Mobo chipset necessitating a upgrade of not just CPU, but Mobo and memory. I can understand swapping out gfx cards fairly regularly but are…
Not a Mac guy, but I believe the Mac Pro normally uses a Xeon chip, which I believe have used fairly stable sockets over the years. For example, socket 604 was used by the Xeon for 5 years, and LGA771 has been supported from 2006 to present.
Re: Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't be too sure of that.. plenty of pros want upgradable systems... Most of the mac pro users I know tend to keep them 4-5 years or more, with an upgrade cycle every 12-24 months (faster cpu, more ram, ssd, etc) in the same box. The new form factor really limits that, and would probably be better served with a consumer grade CPU etc.. this is much closer to a mid-range desktop a lot of people have been asking for,…
this is much closer to a mid-range desktop a lot of people have been asking for, except it's going to cost an arm and a leg. Kind of like Apple is pulling something like this: Mid-range desktop you say? Hmm... Yes, I've got just the thing- How about a mid-range desktop with the price of a top-end desktop?
That's definitely how this looks.
If it turns out that there are actually a range of machines, with GPU options other than Firepro, this could still end up as a very compelling mid-to-high-end personal desktop.